Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
GTX 1660 vs 320M
Combined performance score
GTX 1660 outperforms 320M by 5487% in our combined benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance ranking | 1175 | 170 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 48 |
Value for money | no data | 25.04 |
Architecture | GT2xx (2009−2012) | Turing (2018−2021) |
GPU code name | MCP89 | Turing TU116 |
Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
Release date | 1 April 2010 (13 years old) | 14 March 2019 (5 years old) |
Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $219 |
Current price | $408 | $252 (1.2x MSRP) |
GeForce 320M and GTX 1660 have a nearly equal value for money.
Technical specs
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
Pipelines / CUDA cores | 32 | 1408 |
Core clock speed | 450 MHz | 1530 MHz |
Boost clock speed | no data | 1785 MHz |
Number of transistors | 486 million | 6,600 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 12 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 23 Watt | 120 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 7.200 | 157.1 |
Size and compatibility
Information on GeForce 320M and GeForce GTX 1660 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | no data | 229 mm |
Width | no data | 2-slot |
Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 8-pin |
Memory
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
Memory type | System Shared | GDDR5 |
Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 6 GB |
Memory bus width | System Shared | 192 Bit |
Memory clock speed | System Shared | 8000 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | no data | 192.1 GB/s |
Shared memory | + | - |
Video outputs and ports
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
HDMI | no data | + |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 11.1 (10_1) | 12 (12_1) |
Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.5 |
OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | N/A | 1.2 |
Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
CUDA | no data | 7.5 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
GTX 1660 outperforms 320M by 5487% in our combined benchmark results.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
GTX 1660 outperforms 320M by 5494% in Passmark.
3DMark Vantage Performance
3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
GTX 1660 outperforms 320M by 3746% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
Full HD | 17
−406%
| 86
+406%
|
1440p | 0−1 | 48 |
4K | 0−1 | 28 |
Performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−2267%
|
71
+2267%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 8−9
−1300%
|
112
+1300%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1833%
|
58
+1833%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3
−3550%
|
73
+3550%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 6−7
−1450%
|
93
+1450%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 8−9
−963%
|
85
+963%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1467%
|
47
+1467%
|
Metro Exodus | 1−2
−5600%
|
57
+5600%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3
−1900%
|
40
+1900%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 6−7
−1200%
|
78
+1200%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−3300%
|
102
+3300%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1233%
|
40
+1233%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−1800%
|
57
+1800%
|
1440p
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
−2750%
|
57
+2750%
|
Hitman 3 | 3−4
−1800%
|
57
+1800%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
−400%
|
40
+400%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 4−5
−1100%
|
48
+1100%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−2300%
|
24
+2300%
|
Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−5800%
|
59
+5800%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−3800%
|
35−40
+3800%
|
4K
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 1−2
−3100%
|
32
+3100%
|
Hitman 3 | 1−2
−3000%
|
31
+3000%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
−37.5%
|
11
+37.5%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−900%
|
30
+900%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 5−6
−520%
|
31
+520%
|
This is how GeForce 320M and GTX 1660 compete in popular games:
1080p resolution:
- GTX 1660 is 406% faster than GeForce 320M
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Far Cry 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1660 is 5800% faster than the GeForce 320M.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, GTX 1660 surpassed GeForce 320M in all 25 of our tests.
Advantages and disadvantages
Performance score | 0.54 | 30.17 |
Recency | 1 April 2010 | 14 March 2019 |
Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 6 GB |
Chip lithography | 40 nm | 12 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 23 Watt | 120 Watt |
The GeForce GTX 1660 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 320M in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce 320M is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 1660 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.